Written by: Rebekah Nix, Edited by: Ashley Tan & Darren Teo
Picture 1: Photo of Kampong Lorong Buangkok.[efn_note] Soo, JX. Kampung Lorong Buangkok. Photograph. 2022. [/efn_note]
1. Personal Narrative
When you think of Singapore’s architecture, what immediately comes to mind? Towering skyscrapers? Streets of shopfronts built to showcase a fusion of Malay, Chinese, and European architectural styles? The conveniently covered walkways? From my rural American background, when I imagined what living in Singapore would be like, the scenes in my mind always included bright city lights, crowded streets, and sleek architecture covered in plants of one origin or another. When I finally arrived in the green metropolis of Singapore and emerged from my SHN, it was exactly how I had imagined it—excluding, of course, my severe underestimation of the heat and humidity. While I loved jumping into a new urban environment and taking advantage of the amenities the city offered me, there came a point when I missed the rural, quiet, peaceful landscape of home. Back in the third largest city in West Virginia, we didn’t even have a central mall. Our city center consisted of shops and restaurants within a three-block diameter of City Hall, so to say I was unfamiliar with cramped highrises and mall complexes like Jem where one building bleeds into another was an understatement.
During our Comparative Social Inquiry module’s section on cities, the Class of 2025 read Professor Chua Beng Huat’s essay “Nostalgia for the Kampungs” about the remaining kampung spirit that perseveres in the era of modern, high-rise HDBs. This essay helped me understand my desire to return to rural landscapes and in turn inspired me to research the Garden City’s developmental history – the beginning of the kampungs, the fires, the rise of HDBs, and the in-between events that restructured Singapore’s built environment.
Picture 2: Huntington, West Virginia city center during a festival.[efn_note]Nix, Rebekah. Huntington, WV. Photograph. March, 2019.[/efn_note]
2. Origin and Early Days of the Kampung
Kampungs in Singapore grew from bungalows and attap dwelling settlements impromptly erected to house the large influx of immigrants to the region from the early 1800s to the 1940s. Many immigrants came to Singapore with the intention of living here for a short period of time and, as a result, preferred makeshift kampungs to overpriced houses in more urban areas. The distinction between kampungs and other styles of housing originally developed from the imperialist British who sectioned off permanent housing areas for their own use and rarely regulated immigrant housing until 1856. During that noteworthy year, the Municipality, the local government established under British rule, set precedents over 70 years for the current land authority we know today as HDB.[efn_note] CHENG SEOW CHENG (1995). THE SINGAPORE IMPROVEMENT TRUST AND PRE-WAR HOUSING. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. [/efn_note] Originally, the Municipality’s job was to help spread healthier hygiene habits to decrease the rate of infection for widespread diseases at the time, but they were also responsible for the demolition of settlements deemed “too unhygienic” by the local authorities. The British turned a blind eye towards soaring housing prices that forced immigrants to further partition their rooms in the shophouses or bungalows. Essentially, they tried to solve the housing problem by blatantly ignoring the issue at hand and never addressing the underlying causes. As Ian Buchannan succinctly puts it, Singapore acted as “a clearing-house for immigrant labor and European capital.”[efn_note] Ibid. [/efn_note].
During the early 20th century, the Labour Party came into power in Britain and implemented reform for the colonies, most notably targeting the housing crisis in Singapore. One channel through which change was implemented was the Singapore Improvement Trust (SIT) that was managed under the Municipality until independence.[efn_note] Ho, Stephanie. “Arts.” E-Resources – National Library Board, Singapore, March 14, 2016. https://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/infopedia/articles/SIP_2016-03-14_142655.html. [/efn_note] Through SIT, which dictated the purpose and priorities of the trust, their main objectives were building roads and backlanes for access to the slums as well as reconstructing areas which posed safety concerns. By 1936, SIT had completed the first 2 public estate projects in Lorong Limau and Tiong Bahru, the beginning of public housing in Singapore. However, since it took 7 years for the ordinance to be passed as legislation, the manpower behind the trust was minimal and SIT wasn’t able to significantly alter the housing landscape. Instead, backlanes served as their primary solution to housing problems in the central area by allowing a route to clear “nightsoil” (excrement) between shophouses.[efn_note] CHENG SEOW CHENG (1995). THE SINGAPORE IMPROVEMENT TRUST AND PRE-WAR HOUSING. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. [/efn_note] Aside from this, nothing was implemented on a large-scale.
Picture 3: Photo of Kampong Lorong Buangkok.[efn_note] Soo, JX. Kampung Lorong Buangkok. Photograph. 2022. [/efn_note]
3. Early Erasure
From the beginning of British rule, housing regulations were a persistent reality, but the erasure of kampungs officially began with the erection of a more efficient housing authority in 1947 under the Housing Committee, the Housing & Development Board. There was constant tension between the disorderly growth of the kampungs and the law, making the city “contested terrain”, as described by NUS Professor Brenda Yeoh.[efn_note] Seng, Loh Kah. “Kampong, Fire, Nation: Towards a Social History of Postwar Singapore.” Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 40, no. 3 (2009): 613–43. http://www.jstor.org/stable/27751588. [/efn_note] After the Great Depression in the 1930s, the population boomed with an influx of unregulated female immigrants, leading to more illegal squatting in the region. When the average household rose from 1 single migrant to a family of 5, the housing crisis and tensions that existed before were exacerbated.[efn_note] Thean, Tara. (2018-09-01). Singapore’s Last Kampung : 1-8. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.25818/q5vy-9nj9 [/efn_note]
Due to more and more kampung communities springing up around the central area, strong networks and associations within local residential populations formed. By the 1950s, the Singapore Farmer’s Association and the Singapore Wooden House Dweller’s Association took root under the People’s Action Party’s left wing and were flagged by the British Labour Party for encouraging unity among kampung dwellers. While they had to rebrand under different names after the colonial authorities deregistered them, the newly established Singapore Country People’s Association and Singapore Rural Residents’ Association brought residents together through crime patrols, education resources, and other programs that embodied the gotong royong (mutual assistance) spirit of the villages.[efn_note] National Archives Singapore. “Blast from the Past.” National Archives Singapore: An institution of National Library Board. Government of Singapore. Accessed September 26, 2022. https://www.nas.gov.sg/archivesonline/blastfromthepast/kampungspirit. [/efn_note] These two associations were so effective in unifying the population that the Housing Board referred to the settlements as “intractable”, a “political force”, and a “discouragement to rapid clearance” in 1959.[efn_note] Seng, Loh Kah. “Kampong, Fire, Nation: Towards a Social History of Postwar Singapore.” Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 40, no. 3 (2009): 613–43. http://www.jstor.org/stable/27751588. [/efn_note]
However, as a result of the politicization of kampung dwellings and the environmental dangers, kampungs were progressively demolished. The language the colonial authorities used when describing the settlements acted as “emergency reform literature”, implicitly influencing those hearing the terminology to view the kampungs negatively. This diction from local authorities criminalized the essence of kampung life and shaped the settlements into a national enemy that posed a challenge to Singaporean modernization. Politicization even extended to the act of demeaning residents of the neighborhoods, labeling them as “squatters” even though the majority paid rent for their houses.[efn_note] Ibid. [/efn_note]
Picture 4: Wide-view of Kampong Lorong Buangkok.[efn_note] Soo, JX. Kampung Lorong Buangkok. Photograph. 2022. [/efn_note]
“The money would be better spent…in building new houses complying with Municipal requirements“
4. Fires (1950-1960)
The fires that consumed entire villages within the city-state reinforced the stigmas surrounding the kampungs. By establishing a divide between those who lived in kampungs and those who did not, it was easy for the PAP to use actual emergency situations in the kampung against the community. From the local authority’s perspective, the residents were complacent with the fires burning their houses to the ground and were irresponsible to not prevent such events. However, the residents themselves viewed this as an ever-present and uncontrollable threat to their way of life. With so many people living in such a small land area, controlling the populace as a resident becomes more than a challenge, it’s impossible.[efn_note] Seng, Loh Kah. “Kampong, Fire, Nation: Towards a Social History of Postwar Singapore.” Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 40, no. 3 (2009): 613–43. http://www.jstor.org/stable/27751588. [/efn_note]
Established first in Bukit Ho Swee, fire fighting squads were created to stand guard around the kampung in case of a fire. While they were considered to be organized under the Fire Brigade based in local police stations, the vast majority of firefighters were from local kampungs and had the resident’s interest at heart.[efn_note] Remember Singapore. “SCDF Heritage Gallery – Singapore’s Firefighting History.” Remember Singapore, August 22, 2014. https://remembersingapore.org/2014/08/22/singapore-firefighting-history/. [/efn_note]
In many ways this organization of the squads was a political development. Around the neighborhoods there were rumors of the local authorities committing arson to free up land for redevelopment. This suspicion was only exacerbated by the government’s rejection of proposals to supply more water as a precaution or provide subsidies for non-combustible roofs. City Council President, McNeice, stated that “The money would be better spent…in building new houses complying with Municipal requirements.”[efn_note] Seng, Loh Kah. “Kampong, Fire, Nation: Towards a Social History of Postwar Singapore.” Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 40, no. 3 (2009): 613–43. http://www.jstor.org/stable/27751588. [/efn_note] In essence, the government purposely didn’t support the continuance of the kampungs and viewed their situation with the fires as a convenient means to achieve their end goal.[efn_note] Ibid. [/efn_note]
Then in 1959, leading up to the general election with the political future of Singapore hanging in the balance, political parties offered relief to victims of kampung fires for electoral gain.[efn_note] Ibid. [/efn_note] During this period of development, the razing of kampungs was seen as an essential part of claiming independence. As a result, politicians attempted to profit from politicizing the urban landscape. There was enough contention over providing Kampung Koo Chye victims with relief to the point where the Social Welfare Department banned political organizations from relief centers. After the PAP won the general election, they created the Urban Development Plan for 1961-1965 through HDB which targeted the “black belt” region of the central district that was viewed as cramped, unhygienic, and a safety hazard.[efn_note] Ibid. [/efn_note]
The Urban Development Plan officials took advantage of the kampung fires to increase public housing. After the Bukit Ho Swee inferno of 1961 which displaced around 16,000 people, HDB signed victims up for public housing on the land that was taken by the SIT before its dissolution[efn_note] Ho, Stephanie. “Arts.” E-Resources – National Library Board, Singapore , March 14, 2016. https://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/infopedia/articles/SIP_2016-03-14_142655.html. [/efn_note] after the Tiong Bahru fire and within four months had constructed 904 flats to resettle the kampung dwellers.[efn_note] Singapore Infopedia. “Bukit Ho Swee Fire.” National Library Board. Government of Singapore, December 8, 2014. https://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/infopedia/articles/SIP_825_2004-12-30.html. [/efn_note] Within two years 83% of the displaced dwellers from Bukit Ho Swee had signed with HDB for public housing. In this way, the housing landscape of newly seceded Singapore gradually became standardized through fire.[efn_note] Seng, Loh Kah. “Kampong, Fire, Nation: Towards a Social History of Postwar Singapore.” Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 40, no. 3 (2009): 613–43. http://www.jstor.org/stable/27751588. [/efn_note]
5. Kampung Nostalgia and Future HDBs
Two elements of the kampung that I have noticed hold a lot of value for Singaporeans include the social experience and the natural environment of the built environment. When the architectural landscape of Singapore switched from mostly small, one-story kampungs to large, concrete public housing developments, the population had to adapt to a completely different style of living. While there are standardized elements that make life easier in modern housing such as reliable plumbing, electricity, and convenient necessities, the kampung still holds a significant amount of nostalgia and is perceived as a time-capsule of sorts, able to transport people back to simpler times. Some aspects of the social and natural environment were lost in this transition—aspects that haven’t been fully recreated in public flats and which I believe could be beneficial to implement in future housing.
In-part due to the close proximity of the houses, the wide verandas, and the adoption of an “open-door policy”, the different households in kampung villages tended to be pretty close-knit. In his interview with the National Archives of Singapore, a former kampung resident, Maarof Salleh, emphasizes that “… at that point in time, there is no real consciousness about you are Chinese, I am Malay, and so on. We mixed around, we exchanged food, cooked. This was a normal thing.”[efn_note] National Archives Singapore. “Blast from the Past.” National Archives Singapore: An institution of National Library Board. Government of Singapore. Accessed September 26, 2022. https://www.nas.gov.sg/archivesonline/blastfromthepast/kampungspirit. [/efn_note] He further describes each villager having a distinguishable role, making others aware of even just one person’s absence. Singaporean doctor, Peter H.L. Wee, states in his book From Farm and Kampong that “cooperation was a hallmark of kampung life,”[efn_note] Wee, Peter H.L. From Farm and Kampong … Singapore: Graham Brash, 1991. [/efn_note] but now, it’s no longer as necessary in HDB flats where people don’t have to interact to get by. If you look beyond issues with race relations at the time, the open-door policy made visiting neighbors and broad community reliance on one another rather commonplace. The residents of the kampungs were close in a way that many believe hasn’t been replicated in HDB complexes.
Is it possible to redesign HDBs to have more communal spaces? There are a few slight changes that could be made which, while difficult to implement, would foster a better living environment. One element of the kampungs which stuck out to me was the presence of porches along each attap house. If you look at any HDB flat, there isn’t an open space outside of the door to gather. The porch traditionally has provided an opportunity for elongated conversations, communion, and leisurely fun. A comfortable social environment can be curated by having a communal area at the front and center of the house where visitors can relax.
The porch has been replaced by a common area, or “void deck”, located on the first level of each HDB building, centered around pillars, elevators, and seating areas. Surprisingly, the void deck wasn’t originally meant as a communal space, but rather as a shelter under which residents could avoid the rain.[efn_note] Tan, Martino. “The Story behind When the ‘Void Deck’ Was Introduced and How It Was Invented.” Mothership.SG – News from Singapore, Asia and around the world, December 27, 2016. https://mothership.sg/2016/12/the-story-behind-when-the-void-deck-was-introduced-and-how-it-was-invented/. [/efn_note] From the ‘70s onward, the deck has served as a common area complete with benches, ping pong tables, vending machines, and other amenities. Void decks have also been used as a way to disperse information and experiences to large audiences. With approximately 80% of Singaporeans living in public housing under HDB, the National Gallery decided to use these space during the 2021 Singapore Art Week to release AR exhibits. Some of the designs portrayed topics such as “climate control and security” and were made easily accessible through the use of QR codes that even the elderly could manage.[efn_note] National Gallery Singapore. “National Gallery Singapore Brings Art to Void Decks Island-Wide.” National Gallery Singapore. Accessed September 27, 2022. https://collections.nationalgallery.sg/. [/efn_note]
However, it is impossible for one deck to service all of an HDB’s residents’ needs to peace and fresh air. While void decks no doubt still play a critical role in residential life – especially culturally in regards to Malay weddings or Chinese funerals — there are simply too many residents in one space for everyone to take advantage of it regularly.[efn_note] Tan, Alvin, Cheryl Sim, and Belinda Tan, 3 National Heritage Board’s E-Books Collection §. Community Heritage Series (2013). [/efn_note]
I think a similar structure as YNC’s sky gardens – where every three floors or so has a common area — would allow resident to grow a community garden, lounge peacefully, and enjoy fresh air while still in the comfort of their relative space. I think this would enhance the social and physical environment of the HDB flats and provide an alternative for the small allotment gardens that HDB residents regularly apply for and rent out.[efn_note] National Parks Board. “Allotment Gardens.” National Parks. National Parks Board, September 15, 2022. https://www.nparks.gov.sg/gardening/allotment-gardens. [/efn_note] All it might entail is a bit of restructuring. This might come in the form of simply widening the current walkways in front of the apartment doors into verandas of sorts and then staggering said verandas to optimize the outdoor experience.
One of the more recent HDB buildings, the 50-storey Pinnacle at Duxton, has 2 sky gardens, 1 available for public use and the other is only open for residential use. The fact that the skygarden on the 50th floor charges the public for entry highlights how in-demand open space in buildings is and how the government is capitalizing off the new design.[efn_note] Housing Development Board. “Design through the Decades.” HDB. Government of Singapore. Accessed September 27, 2022. https://www.hdb.gov.sg/about-us/history/design-through-the-decades. [/efn_note] Now, imagine the Pinnacle at Duxton with a void deck and 8 times the number of skygardens. Since the newer model used for this housing development maximizes space and is 3 times more dense than the average HDB, it would make sense to add a little of space above for the inhabitants to get a breath of fresh air.[efn_note] Livin Spaces·Nov 26 2018·0. “The Pinnacle @ Duxton in Singapore by Arc Studio Exemplifies Modern High-Rise, High Density Housing.” Livin Spaces. A Nenayo Media Company, October 16, 2021. https://www.livinspaces.net/projects/architecture/the-pinnacle-duxton-in-singapore-by-arc-studio-exemplifies-modern-high-rise-high-density-housing/. [/efn_note]
The story of the kampungs is just one example of how Singaporeans have progressively had to concede their land. In a country where land is a privilege, how do you make space for yourself? I would really enjoy hearing a wider perspective on the topic of space-making and reclamation, so please leave a comment or contact me with your thoughts and experiences!